Well this is all well and good, but I think we are loosing sight of what is shallow and unimportant. And I ,for one, am rather disappointed.
From the Vet 50 fencers perspective, I think she is "kinda" hot.
Yeah, absolutely but then the guns, SUV, ultra-conservative thing makes even more inaccessible to the likes of me...
I mean she was a beauty queen. She is middle age hot.
I just don't want her to be second-in-command.
Plus, I think there will be some very ugly cat fights between her and Cindy McCain (an ex-pageant queen herself - 1968 Junior Rodeo Queen of Arizona) if they end up in the white house.
Paolo
__________________
"He is a man of splendid abilities but utterly corrupt. He shines and stinks like rotten mackerel by moonlight." "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats."
It's not funny 666, but what you laugh at tells me a bit about you.
That's very funny, and the fact that you not only lack a sense of humor but do so in such a way so as that you feel the need to share it with others tells me a bit about you.
I actually think that nailing Palin for the inexperience thing is not the strongest argument against her. It does two things: (1) remind voters of Obama's alleged lack of experience, and (2) take away from the real issues.
Instead, I'd focus on (1) her connection with Pat Buchanan; (2) her position on teaching creationism in the schools; (3) her approach to a woman's right to choose (or lack thereof), (4) what she would do about the mortgage crisis, (5) global warming and climate change, and (6) her religion (Pentacostalism is as scary to the working class Catholic votes as Mormonism is to the Evangelical vote - snakebites anyone?). A focus on these issues will show the true underlying, radical positions of the Republican party.
My read is that she was picked to groom her for the future - because the Republican operatives realize that they have no real chance of winning this election - surge or not. The real problem that they face is the mortgage and housing crisis - which has decimated the exurban communities that they count on for support. They've proven that their answer to that is, basically, tough noogies, and that will not play too well in these communities.
So why not swing for the fences, break a "glass ceiling" in a costless manner, and set someone up for national office in 4 or 8 years? Looking at it this way, Palin makes some sense.
As for me, she scares the bejeezus out of me... but then again, I believe that women's bodies belong to them, humans have caused climate change, that polar bears are endangered, that we evolved from something, and that Pat Buchanan was a fringe candidate. Also, I think that about the only thing she has in common with Hillary Clinton is the lack of a Y chromosome. But I digress...
I actually think that nailing Palin for the inexperience thing is not the strongest argument against her. It does two things: (1) remind voters of Obama's alleged lack of experience, and (2) take away from the real issues.
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CadetVet
Instead, I'd focus on (1) her connection with Pat Buchanan;
Huh? She wore a button of his because he was visiting her town while she was mayor, and said she'd wear anyone major politician's pin if they came to her town at the time. Besides, 80% of the population don't care/know about Buchanan anyway...he's been out of the spotlight for some time now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CadetVet
(2) her position on teaching creationism in the schools;
Hmmm...let's see what she's said on the subject:
“I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”
She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum.
Members of the state school board, which sets minimum requirements, are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature.
“I won’t have religion as a litmus test, or anybody’s personal opinion on evolution or creationism,” Palin said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CadetVet
(3) her approach to a woman's right to choose (or lack thereof),
Irrelevant, as this issue is pretty much divided on party lines anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CadetVet
(4) what she would do about the mortgage crisis,
No politician has a great answer for this one...no matter what course of action a politician stakes on it, it alienates somebody else...unless you're Obama, and don't stake out any specific solutions to problems, just talk about hope, change and taxing the rich/corporations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CadetVet
(5) global warming and climate change,
McCain's already touched on this point to some degree, and the American public really doesn't care much about the issue, either. Sure, when polled they say they do, but when they have a choice to pay more for an eco-friendly product over a regular one, the regular one wins every time. Palin will help McCain by talking about tapping into existing US energy sources, oil and otherwise, to relive energy prices and improve national security. The public DOES care about those issue, and this will go over well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CadetVet
(6) her religion (Pentacostalism is as scary to the working class Catholic votes as Mormonism is to the Evangelical vote - snakebites anyone?).
Like most religions, Pentecostals have extreme and moderate factions...and the snake-biters are on the far extreme of the bunch. Unless you get some videos of her doing it, I don't it'll matter much. Not as much as seeing Obama listen to racially charged hate sermons for 20 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CadetVet
My read is that she was picked to groom her for the future - because the Republican operatives realize that they have no real chance of winning this election - surge or not.
If they really wanted to groom her for the future, they'd let her stay as governor in Alaska for a few more years to increase her time in executive leadership and score more points for cleaning up corruption. This pick shows that McCain thinks he can win if he takes a chance.
Instead, I'd focus on (1) her connection with Pat Buchanan; (2) her position on teaching creationism in the schools; (3) her approach to a woman's right to choose (or lack thereof), (4) what she would do about the mortgage crisis, (5) global warming and climate change, and (6) her religion (Pentacostalism is as scary to the working class Catholic votes as Mormonism is to the Evangelical vote - snakebites anyone?). A focus on these issues will show the true underlying, radical positions of the Republican party.
SNIP
As for me, she scares the bejeezus out of me... but then again, I believe that women's bodies belong to them, humans have caused climate change, that polar bears are endangered, that we evolved from something, and that Pat Buchanan was a fringe candidate. Also, I think that about the only thing she has in common with Hillary Clinton is the lack of a Y chromosome. But I digress...
You seem to be forgetting one important thing. She was not chosen to win over people like you and me, for which points #1-5 are above the radar, and negatives. In all likelihood, she was chosen to a) shore up the vote (especially the voter enthusiasm) among the Dobson followers, and b) appeal to the voters who go for a candidate with XX chromosomes over all else - including the policy positions of that candidate.
McCain is not going for you are a potential voter, and how much you dislike his ticket is on no interest to him. Once you have made up your mind to not vote for him, you are lost cause for him and he does not give a d*mn about your preferences.
BTW: New Mexico, Alaska, Hawaii(Illinois), Delaware. The big-staters must feel really left out this time!
OK, I will bite. What is so funny with this picture? To me, it looks like just another screen capture (or screen photo) from a news program. No funny misspellings, not unfortunate juxtapositions, nothing out of the ordinary that I notice.
Grimaldi, while I do applaud you for being rational....Many of your arguments are made moot by the point that most people aren't. You say some things are irrelevant, like her religion. While I agree with you that they are irrellevant overall to rational people, most citizens are not rational about these things. This is unfortunate, but most political ploys are not built to target the rational people. They are built to change the minds of the unstable, irrational voters, who will actually do something as stupid as vote for somebody based on religion, sex, or skin color.
Also, nicely done, Pescados.
__________________
The Angel of Death Strikes!
If you can fool your friends, you can fool your enemies...
You say some things are irrelevant, like her religion. While I agree with you that they are irrellevant overall to rational people, most citizens are not rational about these things. This is unfortunate, but most political ploys are not built to target the rational people. They are built to change the minds of the unstable, irrational voters, who will actually do something as stupid as vote for somebody based on religion, sex, or skin color.
I agree with you to a point...about 2/3 of voters are stable (and arguably rational) as they vote fairy consistently for a certain core set of beliefs, represented by their political party. The last 1/3, the independents in the middle, are oddballs because they seem to vote less on specific policies and more on who they happen to like on an almost personal level.
While irrational and difficult to predict, I don't think you have to worry so much about things like religion and abortion with these (or the other) voters. The voters on both wings are already set in their beliefs, and the ones in the middle don't care so much about these issues, so as long as you aren't portrayed as extreme on the issues, the voters won't care. Abortion? The middle voters will say they want women to be able to have them for rape, incest....maybe in the early stages of pregnancy, but they'll be against partial birth/late term abortions, abortions for children without parental knowledge, etc. Middle voters (usually) prefer a candidate who is Christian, but not extremely so. I honestly believe many Democrats attend church for the sole purpose of keeping enough cred to win over some of these middle voters, as a self-professed atheist would not do well in any but the most liberal districts.
I agree with you to a point...about 2/3 of voters are stable (and arguably rational) as they vote fairy consistently for a certain core set of beliefs, represented by their political party.
This is true to a point. They vote for their political party, and will often make excuses or not believe things if their chosen party is doing things different. This will be the case until it directly effects them. Until they have the hurt put on them directly, most people will keep going with the one they grew up with/for. The majority of people do not take the time to research, and will often have huge misconceptions about candidates, often made by which story is more sensationalist, and therefore reaches their ears.
I have met way too many people who have core beliefs that do not sync up with those they support. This is getting better with the proliferation of internet use, but not everybody that can use the internet uses it well, or even processes the information given properly.
__________________
The Angel of Death Strikes!
If you can fool your friends, you can fool your enemies...
.. and again, she has two years of executive experience (not counting the mayor thing), so while executive experience may represent an essential quality for office it is not yet clear that she really gained any - I guess we will have to wait for the details of her governance in Alaska.
Talking about results of experience is probably splitting a hair too finely for most voters. The existence of the experience is probably all they can be asked to grasp, and whether its two years or two months its still that much more than Obama has got...
Quote:
Of course if executive experience of any sort is essential it counts against three out of the four. So does that make the McCain ticket only half as bad?
You're forgetting that McCain held command rank in the Air Force. The military uses a pretty executive-based model.
However, I have been reading that the McCain camp had made the decision that the inexperience line had just about played out and they were going to move on to other criticisms anyway...
Quote:
Originally Posted by damianip
Plus, I think there will be some very ugly cat fights between her and Cindy McCain (an ex-pageant queen herself - 1968 Junior Rodeo Queen of Arizona) if they end up in the white house.
Paolo
Just so long as they are conducted in the proper media, such as mud, oil or Jello.
__________________
Use the Shift key, people! Keyboard manufacturers everywhere are ineffably saddened when you ignore what they made just for you!
Linear Mode
